NIH: Developing And Funding Research In Emergency Care And Training The Next Generation Of Emergency Care Researchers

Koroshetz, Walter J.; Brown, Jeremy

doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2013.0833

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Lack of departmental research infrastructure, inadequate number of research collaborations, and lack of protected time in a clinical‐oriented department are other factors 14 . While solutions for increasing EM research have been proposed, 14–17 this study suggests that parity in the amount time that faculty devote to research between EM and other specialties is not yet achieved. Given the higher levels of involvement in teaching than other clinical faculty, education‐focused research may be an important area for EPs to increase skill levels and scholarly output.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Engagement and Workplace Satisfaction of Emergency Medicine Faculty in the United States

Lucas

Dandar

Scott

2020

AEM Education and Training

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The objective was to determine the drivers of workplace satisfaction and attrition for emergency medicine (EM) faculty in U.S. medical schools.Methods: Dimensions of workplace satisfaction measured in the Association of American Medical Colleges StandPoint Faculty Engagement Survey from 36 U.S. Liaison Committee on Medical Accreditation-accredited medical schools were analyzed by multiple regression analysis to determine the factors associated with overall workplace satisfaction and intention to leave. These were compared to faculty from non-EM clinical departments.Results: In total, 737 EM faculty (response rate 66%) completed the survey. Over 50% of EM faculty are less than 45 years old, of junior rank, and on a nontenure track, different than non-EM colleagues. Overall satisfaction with one's department as a place to work was 76% and one's medical school as a place to work was 69%, similar to other clinical faculty. Overall satisfaction is 87% for EM faculty with a formal mentor compared to 68% for those who do not. One's nature of work, departmental governance, collegiality and collaboration, and the clinical practice environment are significant factors in overall workplace satisfaction. EM faculty spend significantly more time on teaching and administrative tasks and less time on research than non-EM faculty. Overall functioning of the ED and ability to provide high-quality care in their practice environment is lower for EM than non-EM faculty. Survey dimensions were poor predictors of intention to leave. Conclusions:Overall EM faculty have high workplace satisfaction similar to other specialties. Ensuring strong departmental leadership, improving the clinical practice environment, and increasing access to a formal mentor may be effective strategies to improve workplace satisfaction for EM faculty.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Engagement and Workplace Satisfaction of Emergency Medicine Faculty in the United States

Lucas

Dandar

Scott

2020

AEM Education and Training

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The network has already initiated a number of projects and is also engaged with the NIH's Office of Emergency Care Research to further the dialogue about the role of emergency care within the broader research environment and to facilitate and coordinate research and training in this area. 11 Through these efforts, we expect to change the situation that a relatively small portion of federally funded research projects are emergency medicine generated despite a rather large number of potential targets for research questions and exposure to over 100 million patients per year. Good science that leads to improved patient outcomes is the shared goal of the NIH, the CTSA program, and emergency care researchers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emergency Medicine Resources Within the Clinical Translational Science Institutes: A Cross-sectional Study

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) program aims to strengthen and support translational research by accelerating the process of translating laboratory discoveries into treatments for patients, training a new generation of clinical and translational researchers, and engaging communities in clinical research efforts. Yet, little is known about how emergency care researchers have interacted with and utilized the resources of academic institutions with CTSAs. Objective The purpose of this survey was to describe how emergency care researchers use local CTSA resources, to ascertain what proportion of CTSA consortium members have active emergency care research programs, and to solicit participation in a national CTSA-associated emergency care translational research network. Methods Survey of all emergency departments affiliated with a CTSA. Results Of the 65 CTSA consortium members, three had no emergency care research program and we obtained responses from 46 of the remaining 62 (74% response rate). The interactions with and resources used by emergency care researchers varied widely. Methodology and biostatistics support was most frequently accessed (77%), followed closely by education and training programs (60%). Several emergency care research programs (76%) had submitted for funding through CTSAs, with 71% receiving awards. Most CTSA consortium members had an active emergency care research infrastructure: 21 (46%) had 24/7 availability to recruit and screen for research, 21 (46%) had less than 24/7 research recruitment. A number of emergency care research programs participated in NIH research networks with the Neurological Emergencies Treatment Trials network most highly represented with 23 (59%) sites. Most emergency care research programs (96%) were interested in participating in a CTSA-based emergency care translational research network. Conclusions Despite little initial involvement in development of the CTSA program, there has been moderate interaction between CTSAs and emergency care. There is considerable interest in participating in a CTSA consortium based emergency care translational research network.

show abstract

“…2 While the OECR does not directly fund research grants, one of the primary goals of the OECR is to help emergency care researchers find appropriate funding partners for their projects. 3 The OECR is an excellent resource for emergency care researchers who do not have an established relationship with the NIH.…”

Section: Participating Organizationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Funding Research in Emergency Department Shared Decision Making: A Summary of the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference Panel Discussion

Dodd

Berman

Brown

et al. 2016

Academic Emergency Medicine

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

T he 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine (AEM) Consensus Conference was focused on creating a policy-relevant, patient-centered research agenda for shared decision making (SDM) in the emergency department (ED). As part of the conference, representatives of a diverse group of funding agencies were assembled to serve on a panel addressing strategies and opportunities to secure funding in ED SDM research. The panel met as a group three times in the year leading up to the conference to identify examples

show abstract

NIH: Developing And Funding Research In Emergency Care And Training The Next Generation Of Emergency Care Researchers

Cited by 7 publications

References 21 publications

Engagement and Workplace Satisfaction of Emergency Medicine Faculty in the United States

Engagement and Workplace Satisfaction of Emergency Medicine Faculty in the United States

Emergency Medicine Resources Within the Clinical Translational Science Institutes: A Cross-sectional Study

Funding Research in Emergency Department Shared Decision Making: A Summary of the 2016 Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference Panel Discussion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About